Of Dialectic and Enquiry

[Johnny B]

Farah, challenge me in chick chasing ,not in theology

Before i answer ,again i repeat , Either of the 2 options i answer to this question will NOT address Mutakalim´s question ,

as it won´t and can´t assign the use of " 'how' is UNKNOWN" to Muslims and deny the Christians .

 

Xiin took the challenge !!

Fisrt it was Logic and Reason not beeing enuf to validate a Revealed Truth ,

then it was questioning the fundmentality of Reason compared to Revelation in beeing the source of knowledge.

Now you ask the ultimacy of Reason compared to Revelation in beeing the source of this time a specefic knowledge "Metaphysical knowledge".

 

Wonder if Xiin agrees with the way you stated the question ,

Reveling in my unaccustomed leisure.,let me tell ya that logic is a wonderful thing.and not a MERE tool

If NGONGE is pretierr than JB and JB is pretierr than Xiin then i got the metaphysical knowledge that NGONGE is pretierr than Xiin , and vice versa .

Since you haven´t asked for Logical knowledge , Sementic knowledge, Systemic knowledge ,Empircal knowledge or Tacit knowledge,ONLY heaven knows what you´re looking for .

Answer is Both .

 

and the reason is, Reason and Revelation can both be the ultimate source of metaphysical knowledge.depending on who is getting the knowledge and what type of knowledge is beein received and through what senses is the knowledge been received.

To widen the gap , i don´t see any clash between the two.,both are channels in which knowledge is delivered: D

We carry knowledge that is revealed to us ,and a knowledge that is gained through other means like logic

.

KNOWLEDGE does imply a Belief.,but Belief does not Imply Knowledge.

Wherever we claim to know that something is true we believe that it is so, but when we claim to believe that something is so, we don’t always claim to know that it is so.

 

This is the last time i answer that evolving question.

 

I shall now pen and show that accepting the literal meaning of Allah’s attributes is the correct theology and that logic is not applicable to validate how these attributes are!

 

sure n pigs fly !!

 

You seem to have missed the point of my argument (I am not arguing against reason per se) and created a dummy arguer instead

 

I rest my case !!

[NGONGE]

^^^ And this is why I agree with, JB.

 

The original question has not been answered.

[xiinfaniin]

@This is the last time i answer that evolving question.

 

And that would spare us from your random and incoherent thoughts!

[Jamster]

Oh come off it JB; is that all you could spit from your spleen infested gut?

 

This whole thing smells of rotten ideological vomit; a place the above dude seems to be at ease with.

[Mutakalim]

Show JB waa fiilasuuf weyn, faseexa uun baa ka maqane

 

Xiinfaniin:- Though the replies of JB are ill expressed and poorly phrased, he has apprehended the truth of the central argument. My eyes are not, good Xiinfaniin, newly educated; thusly, your attempt of buttressing your post with scholastic references is a peculiar admixuture of naivete and sophistry. I am not fond of redundancy, so I will not re-write the argument. Till you address the argument, I shall remain unresponsive. I can provide you with an argument; however, I cannot provide you with intelligence.

 

With Salaams

PK

[xiinfaniin]

Mutakallim,

 

If in fact feylasuuf JB’s disjointed argument represent yours, then this thread needs to be brought to halt; to continue would be nothing less than dragging articles of faith in front of a court full of fallible mortals whose extravaganza of sophistry cloak their receding intelligence. As it stands, the underlying argument of your provocative writing is muted and it’s worthy of note that your curiosity exceeded your meager knowledge!

 

Halkaa ha noo joogto.